2008 (8) TMI 312

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... The judgment of the court was delivered by K. L. MANJUNATH J.- This appeal is by the Revenue, challenging the concurrent finding of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) (hereinafter referred to as "the Appellate Commissioner" for short), which has been confirmed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Bangalore Bench "B", (hereinafter referred to as "the Tribunal" for short), in I. T. A. No....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Rs. 4,13,120. The same was taken up for scrutiny. During the course of the scrutiny, it was noticed by the Assessing Officer that the plant and machinery purchased on March 31, 1996, was not reflected in the closing stock and similarly, the statement shown to the banker and in the return of income filed by the assessee before the Department there is a difference in value of closing stock to an ext....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....assessee to show the value of the closing stock for the purpose of banking and disclosing the lesser amount in the return of income filed before the Assessing Officer. The Appellate Commissioner accepted the explanation offered by the assessee that it being a small scale unit, is unable to maintain an accountant by paying huge salary and the entire stock-in-trade was in the warehouse governed by t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....or the Department is that the plant and machinery were under transit and it was for the assessee to reflect the same in the books of account. It is no doubt true that the assessee has not done it. Merely because it has not been done is not a ground to assess the value of the goods received by the assessee after March 31, 1996. as an income. Therefore, we have to answer substantial question of law ....